Beginner Testing my flash diffuser to control highlights.

•

A diffusor will reduce the harshness of the specular
surfaces but it will make them bigger as well!

An other point is the direction of the light that will as
seen here flattens the tonal range in the captures.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
•

A diffusor will reduce the harshness of the specular
surfaces but it will make them bigger as well!

An other point is the direction of the light that will as
seen here flattens the tonal range in the captures.
Click to expand...
Yeah, unfortunately I am still limited to the on camera pop-up flash at the moment, so diffusing it is the best option at the moment. I think I have got the balance right, more diffusion would probably be too far.
 
Orangecroc said:
more diffusion would probably be too far.
Click to expand...


Not really as it is often the only way out but
not in popup approach, you're right in this.
 
Ben you are doing well with the kit you have.
 
GardenersHelper said:
I understood you to mean that the popup approach would be inappropriate.
Click to expand...


Yes, this is what I meant, literally…
but when the light source is extended
and fit with extra diffusion at an angle
that an other light setup.
 
•

Cool Ben!

Did you make sure the diffusor
inclination is -/+ 45°?
 
GardenersHelper said:
What is the rationale for that angle Daniel?
Click to expand...


The better suggestion would be 60°+
and the rationale is the greater control
over the specular surfaces.
 
GardenersHelper said:
What is the rationale for that angle Daniel?
Click to expand...


The better suggestion would be 60°+
and the rationale is the greater control
over the specular surfaces.
 
GardenersHelper said:
why would one particular angle for the flash be favoured?
Click to expand...


The greatest possible angle to accommodate a
given scene with the greatest possible diffusion.
I know you know!
 
Kodiak Qc said:
The greatest possible angle to accommodate a
given scene with the greatest possible diffusion.
I know you know!
Click to expand...

Not only don't I know, I don't understand. What has the angle got to do with the amount of diffusion?

I don't understand "greatest" in this context either. Arguably the greatest possible angle would be 90 degrees, i.e. illumination straight down from the top. Should I read that as "best possible angle"?
 
GardenersHelper said:
Not only don't I know, I don't understand.
Click to expand...


Sorry, I thought you were pulling my leg, and I an-
swered for the benefit of the readers as I thought
you knew all that.

Working in natural set ups may be very confusing
as conditions are changing all the time and finding
a common denominator out of these maybe extre-
mely difficult.

As I was working in the science photography dept.
at the university, my old mentor told me that these
problems can only be understood and solved in stu-
dio conditions, and he was damn right… as always.

The angle of incidence is inversely relevant to the
size of the diffusion; where the greater diffusion may
permit greater choice of angle of incidence on a same
given subject and situation thus controlling the specu-
dar features of any surface… may it be even glass.

I will leave you on this, Nick, as my bedtime is well
over due! Good night my friend.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
Sorry, I thought you were pulling my leg,
Click to expand...

No. On line I don't do jokes or levity.

Kodiak Qc said:
Working in natural set ups may be very confusing as conditions are changing all the time and finding a common denominator out of these may be extremely difficult.
Click to expand...
Kodiak Qc said:
As I was working in the science photography dept. at the university, my old mentor told me that these problems can only be understood and solved in studio conditions, and he was damn right… as always.
Click to expand...

"these problems can only be understood and solved in studio conditions"? I disagree. Studio investigations can contribute to the understanding of specific aspects of the problems, but it is also essential to carry out investigations and test prospective solutions in the complexity of the target environment. This "reality testing" cannot be addressed solely by a reductionist, simplifying studio-based approach. IMO.

Kodiak Qc said:
The angle of incidence is inversely relevant to the size of the diffusion;
Click to expand...

I cannot ascribe a meaning to this statement. It seems to imply something like "As the angle of incidence increases the size of the diffusion decreases, and vice versa." I can't make any sense out of that.

What is the "size of the diffusion"?

What (unique, singular) "angle of incidence" is this? The angle of incidence will vary across a curved surface, of which there are many on insects.

And what is the nature of this "inverse relevance"?

Kodiak Qc said:
where the greater diffusion may permit greater choice of angle of incidence on a same given subject and situation thus controlling the specudar features of any surface… may it be even glass.
Click to expand...

"Greater" could do with being disambiguated here I think; it could mean "larger" or "more thoroughly diffused", or both.

Do you mean that with a larger diffuser and/or more thoroughly diffused illumination there will be light hitting any particular point on the subject from a greater range of angles, thus reducing the intensity of highlights coming off of reflective areas?

That makes sense to me. Indeed, it is a principle/understanding/belief I employ in building my diffusers.

But I don't see what it has to do with the angle of the diffuser (you have suggested 45 degrees, and 60 degrees), which is where we started this discussion.
 
Last edited:
GardenersHelper said:
This "reality testing" cannot be addressed solely by a reductionist, simplifying studio-based approach. IMO.
Click to expand...
I learned that the most precious tool in a photographer's
bag is predictability. In any given situations, the sum of
one's experiences will be essential to evaluate difficulties
and find an appropriate strategy.

In a studio situation, the conditions are controllable and
contant. Data is easier to process and the results are
recognizable strategies that will lead to greater predicta-
bility that maybe extrapolated to other situations IME (in
my experience).

Try with the worst subject of all: the humble marble.
GardenersHelper said:
I cannot ascribe a meaning to this statement
Click to expand...
Kodiak Qc said:
The angle of incidence is inversely relevant to the size of the diffusion
Click to expand...
​
The importance of the angle of incidence becomes less
relevant the larger the size of the diffusion
GardenersHelper said:
It seems to imply something like "As the angle of incidence increases the size of the diffusion decreases, and vice versa." I can't make any sense out of that.
Click to expand...
Studio conditions will reveal it.
GardenersHelper said:
What is the "size of the diffusion"?
Click to expand...
Any size! The larger the light source the lesser the angle
of incidence maybe. Working with insects will reduce the
relative size.
GardenersHelper said:
And what is the nature of this "inverse relevance"?
Click to expand...
the larger one is, the less critical the angle of her other.
GardenersHelper said:
"Greater" could do with being disambiguated here I think; it could mean "larger" or "more thoroughly diffused", or both.
Click to expand...
Yes, LARGER was meant. The level of diffusion is not
determined by the number of diffusing layers but by the
distance of the light source.
GardenersHelper said:
Do you mean that with a larger diffuser and/or more thoroughly diffused illumination there will be light hitting any particular point on the subject from a greater range of angles, thus reducing the intensity of highlights coming off of reflective areas?
Click to expand...
BINGO!
GardenersHelper said:
But I don't see what it has to do with the angle of the diffuser (you have suggested 45 degrees, and 60 degrees), which is where we started this discussion.
Click to expand...
You should, Nick, as you proved your understanding with
a perfect conclusion in the point before.
 
Last edited:
Orangecroc said:
the pringle tube diffuser is certainly not a pro tool haha.
Click to expand...


I am mentoring a neophyte photographer in Namibia.
All his studio is DIY and he produces outstanding shots
for his level and non-pro equipment.

It is not the gear that makes/takes a picture.
You know that.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
I learned that the most precious tool in a photographer's
bag is predictability. In any given situations, the sum of
one's experiences will be essential to evaluate difficulties
and find an appropriate strategy.

In a studio situation, the conditions are controllable and
contant. Data is easier to process and the results are
recognizable strategies that will lead to greater predicta-
bility that maybe extrapolated to other situations IME (in
my experience).

Try with the worst subject of all: the humble marble.

​
The importance of the angle of incidence becomes less
relevant the larger the size of the diffusion

Studio conditions will reveal it.

Any size! The larger the light source the lesser the angle
of incidence maybe. Working with insects will reduce the
relative size.

the larger one is, the less critical the angle of her other.

Yes, LARGER was meant. The level of diffusion is not
determined by the number of diffusing layers but by the
distance of the light source.

BINGO!

You should, Nick, as you proved your understanding with
a perfect conclusion in the point before.
Click to expand...

We disagree about some things. Let's leave it there. I don't think continuing this will contribute positively to Ben's thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top